“Close the Door and Beat the Dog”
- 03.20.2008 - 10:48 AMThe apposite Chinese saying with respect to the unrest in Tibet is bimen dagou: “close the door and beat the dog.” And with news coverage halted over a vast area of Western China, and endless columns of military vehicles heading in, who can doubt that the dog will be well and thoroughly beaten?
Certainly no one in the official west. The officially-expressed lack of condemnation of the latest installment in China’s decades-long destruction of Tibet is proof that the smart money figures the fix is in. Beijing will crush things without any outsiders having a chance to watch; no one will dare ask tough questions or criticize; things will then get back to “normal,” where China stories are all about trade and the Olympics.
But suppose that quick resolution doesn’t occur? Suppose the dog proves tougher than expected? Suppose stomach-turning video of the beating somehow reaches the outside world? Suppose the problem goes unfixed for days or weeks more, or spreads? Suppose the Chinese leadership itself begins to disagree about what to do? What then? A real crisis may arise, a crisis for which no one is prepared.
That possibility was confirmed on Thursday 20 March, as word came from official Chinese news services that Tibet was not yet under control and that unrest was spreading. Canadian journalists managed to get striking footage of new demonstration through the formidable Chinese news firewall.
Spring has a strange resonance in Chinese history: many trains of events culminating in major shifts have begun in this season. In 1989, it was the death, on April 15, of the former prime minister Hu Yaobang and public dissatisfaction at the Party’s failure to honor him that started the movement victimized in the Tiananmen bloodbath less than three months later. (The date gave the movement its name). June 4 1989 took its place with May 4 1919 (the nationalist demonstrations against the Treaty of Versailles) and May 30 1925 (major pro-labor, anti-Empire protest) among the milestones of regime-shaking popular unrest in China.
Something similar could happen this year. Unless the Chinese government succeeds in crushing the Tibetans cleanly and without publicity, we are likely to see a multiplication of grievances being aired–by ordinary Chinese as well as by subject peoples like the Tibetans and the Muslims of East Turkestan. Workers are already out on strike in Guangdong in the southeast. Plenty of anger is out there: over corruption, injustice, poverty, pollution, dictatorship–more than enough for a conflagration.
Washington is not even considering such a possibility. Instead Secretary Rice is urging the Chinese to “show restraint“, which I take to mean restraint in the numbers killed and brutality employed as order is restored. But suppose order is not restored, and things get worse? Now is not too early to start thinking about whom we support then–and what values we should, as a democracy, espouse.
| »Back to Contentions | »Back to Commentary |
March 20th, 2008 at 11:45 AM
Secretary Rice asked China to show restraint. That is certainly a weak statement. In 1989, there was no public statement from the United States at all. I assume that President G. H. W. Bush privately assured China that the United States would not object, even if there was no restraint.
March 20th, 2008 at 12:25 PM
Professor Waldron is a keen and deeply informed student of China. I hope our leaders at the state department and miltary are giving serious thought to what he has to say. Things could move very quickly and we need to be fully prepared to have real and constructive responses to this potential tipping point in the making.
March 20th, 2008 at 3:03 PM
This short piece is an improvment over things we have seen on China at this website. While Chinese leadership shows signs that it is loosening up, Waldron reminds us that not much has changed, and that we should not be surprised by anything that is happening in Tibet. Arthur Waldron has a sharp mind and holds many accurate views on China. I would like to see more of his writing at Commentary.
March 20th, 2008 at 3:17 PM
[…] Waldron, a sharp academic, has written a poignant piece at Commentary on the crisis in Tibet. He understands the China game well: The officially-expressed […]
March 20th, 2008 at 6:47 PM
It would be inexcusable for President Bush to go through with his plan to attend the Olympics after this.
March 22nd, 2008 at 2:00 AM
I agree with Mr. Waldron’s insightful article. I too think that the leaders in both Canada and the US have not taken a strong enough public stance on the plight of Tibetan annexation by China. Money speaks these days and even the International Olympic committee is in on the money grab and refuses to speak about Chinese communist brutality against the peaceful (until now) and largely Buddhist population of Tibet. The culture and religion of the people of Tibet are being systematically eradicated. The people are crying out for real change to happen. Why aren’t the western democracies helping them?
April 1st, 2008 at 10:57 PM
[…] China’s strategy in dealing with the massive pro-independence protests across Tibet conforms with the old Chinese saying, bimen dagou: “close the door and beat the dog.” […]